Talk:Endsleigh Cottage

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Winged Blades of Godric in topic Requested move 27 November 2017

Requested move 27 November 2017 edit

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved'. Winged Blades Godric 06:49, 5 December 2017 (UTC)Reply


Endsleigh CottageEndsleigh – According to Historic England, the name of this park is simply Endsleigh.[1] The "Endsleigh" page is currently a disambiguation page, but there are only two other articles - Endsleigh Insurance and Endsleigh League. Recommend making this article the primary, and using a disambig hatnote at the top of this page to point to the other two. Kelly hi! 20:55, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

No, sorry that would be WP:MALPLACED. The main use in News is the insurance company, the current set up is fine. And page views are about 50/50. Perfect as is. In ictu oculi (talk) 23:22, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
It's not perfect in that "Endsleigh Cottage" is no longer used as a name. As mentioned above, the park is known simply as "Endsleigh"[2] and the building within the park formerly known as Endsleigh Cottage is called "Endsleigh House" by Historic England[3] and "Hotel Endsleigh" by the current owners.[4] Kelly hi! 07:44, 28 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
No I was only saying the distribution of basename space and articles is perfect. Of Endsleigh House About 1,260 results vs Endsleigh Cottage About 1,060 results it seems to be 55/45ish, so no objection to move to House. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:29, 28 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose Zero evidence has been provided which suggests this is the primary topic for "Endsleigh". In reality, page views are very split and news coverage actually favours the insurance company. "Cottage" (or "House") is an example of perfect natural disambiguation. AusLondonder (talk) 19:39, 28 November 2017 (UTC)Reply
  • Oppose. Definitely not the primary topic. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:43, 29 November 2017 (UTC)Reply

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.